Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.A K Barnwal vs Science And Technology on 27 October, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr.A K Barnwal vs Science And Technology on 27 October, 2010
               CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
   Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
                             Delhi-110066

                         File No. CIC/LS/A/2010/001522

Appellant                                     Shri A.K. Baranwal
Public Authority                              National Informatic Centre, New
                                              Delhi.
Date of hearing                               27.10.2010
Date of decision                              27.10.2010

Facts

:-

Heard today dated 27.10.2010. Appellant present. The NIC is
represented by Dr. Kashi Nath, DDG(AA), Dr. Swarup Dutt, Scientist ‘B'(CPIO)
and Shri Gopal Krishna, Director(Admn.).

2. The parties are heard. It is the submission of the appellant that he had
sent a number of written representations to different authorities in NIC & DIT but
he has not received any response from them. He has sought action taken report
on his representations which have been denied by the CPIO & AA.

3. It is explained to the appellant that the Commission is concerned only
with the RTI applications filed under section 6(1) of the RTI Act. The RTI
application should necessarily be accompanied by the prescribed fee of Rs. 10/-.
All such RTI applications are mandated to be responded to by the CPIO. If he is
aggrieved with the decision of the CPIO, he is at liberty to file first appeal before
AA. If he is aggrieved with the decision of the AA, he may move the
Commission for appropriate decision. It is also explained to the appellant that the
Commission has no jurisdiction to take any action on his so called representations
which are not in the form of RTI application as stipulated in section 6(1) of the
RTI Act and are not accompanied by the prescribed fee. At best, these
representations are administrative in nature which, ordinarily, should be
responded to by the concerned authorities but assuming that these are not
responded to, the Commission has no jurisdiction therein for the reason that these
representations are not RTI applications/appeals filed under the relevant
provisions of the Act.

3. The appellant is not satisfied with the view taken by the Commission and
has own philosophy on RTI Act and its provisions. The Commission, however,
is not impressed with his personal interpretation of law. The matter is closed.

Sd/-

(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the
CPIO of this Commission.

( K.L. Das )
Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :-

1. The Public Information Officer,
National Informatics Centre,
CGO Complex, Lodhi road,
New Delhi-110003.

2. Shri Anil Kumar Baranwal,
21/14, Shah Niwas, E.C. Road,
Dehradun, Uttrakhand